Skip to Main Content

Infrastructure Software

Announcement

For appeals, questions and feedback about Oracle Forums, please email oracle-forums-moderators_us@oracle.com. Technical questions should be asked in the appropriate category. Thank you!

inconsistent IP behavior between global and local zone...

807559Mar 24 2005 — edited Apr 5 2005
Hey guys...

I'm running into something slightly weird that I was hoping others could comment on...

Lets boil it down to this:

- In the GLOBAL-zone "ping -s" the NODENAME, and see where the returns come from.
- In a LOCAL-zone "ping -s" the (zone)-NODENAME, and see where the returns come from.


(note: we're NOT trying to communicate between nodes/zones. We only talk to ourselves... )



In my case the "returns" come from either the NIC-main-IP (which is to be expected) in the case of the global zone, and from the LOOP-back in case of the local-zone. This appears inconsistent...


--

So this isn't really inter-zone communication (that would happen across the loopback) it's a matter of "talking to yourself" kind of thing. If you "talk to yourself" in a global zone, you use the actual IP (or at least you appear to from a user-perspective... Who really knows what
happens behind the scenes...). If you do it in a local-zone, it seems to use the loopback directly, and it SHOWS that to the user....

[ I'm running into a problem with an application installation tool that uses this type of TEST to confirm some install-parameters... ]

So from where I'm sitting, this appears to be an inconsistency between local and global zones, possibly a case where some of the zone "smoke and mirrors" bleeds through to to surface.


(note: my /etc/hosts file defines ONLY "localhost" as 127.0.01, while the node-name (and FQDN node-name) are paired with the actual IP of the zone. )


Can other confirm this behavior on their zones, and can anyone think of a work-around to have the local-zone behave more in-line with the global?

Thanks,

-- MikeE
Comments
Locked Post
New comments cannot be posted to this locked post.
Post Details
Locked on May 3 2005
Added on Mar 24 2005
8 comments
194 views